Cited by 25Prenatal Screening and DiagnosticsReproductive System and PregnancyReproductive Health and Technologies

Yolk sac size & shape as predictors of first trimester pregnancy outcome: A prospective observational study

Suguna, B., Sukanya, K.·2019·Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction

Abstract

Objective To determine the value of yolk sac size and shape for prediction of pregnancy outcome in the first trimester.Material and methods 500 pregnant women between 6+0 and 9+6 weeks of gestation underwent transvaginal ultrasound and yolk sac diameter (YSD), gestational sac diameter (GSD) were measured, presence/absence of yolk sac (YS) and shape of the yolk sac were noted. Follow up ultrasound was done to confirm fetal well-being between 11+0 and 12+6 weeks and was the cutoff point of success of pregnancy.Results Out of 500 cases, 8 were lost to follow up, YS was absent in 14, of which 8 were anembryonic pregnancies. Thus, 478 out of 492 followed up cases were analyzed for YS shape and size and association with the pregnancy outcome. In our study, abnormal yolk sac shape had a sensitivity and specificity (87.06% & 86.5% respectively, positive predictive value (PPV) of 58.2%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.8% in predicting a poor pregnancy outcome as compared to yolk sac diameter (sensitivity and specificity 62.3% & 64.1% respectively and PPV and NPV of 27.3% and 88.7% respectively). The degree of association for both the variables was significant to the level of p<0.000.Conclusion The presence or absence of yolk sac has a strong predictive value for poor pregnancy outcome. Yolk sac shape was a better predictor of poor pregnancy outcome in terms of higher specificity and negative predictive value as compared to yolk sac diameter.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.10.016

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 21 · Cited by 25

Authors
Suguna, B., & Sukanya, K.
Affiliations
Bangalore Baptist Hospital (IN)
Venue
Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-03
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
159-164
ISSN
2468-7847 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2899431876
Cited by
25
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
Keywords
yolk sac, yolk sac diameter, gestational sac diameter, first trimester, pregnancy outcome prediction, anembryonic pregnancy, transvaginal ultrasound, fetal well-being, early pregnancy loss
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Pregnancy Outcome, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Prospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Yolk Sac, Ultrasonography, Prenatal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review